Thread: 99 Se vs 2000 gt 5.0L mustang

2 things...the Stang didn't have a 5.0 in '95...it had the 4.6. That was the first year for it. Again...there was no 5.0 in '00. It was in the '94 SN95 Mustang only and now has been re-instated and code named the Coyote in the new '11 5.0 GT

Ok.

My Cobalt is an LT. An N/A 2.2. It's slow. I was trying to prove a point that you missed. I would hope a GTO beats a SS/SC stock for stock.

Whoooppssss...that's a technical foul.

U don't know anything about them but u know its a 5.0?.......how? Cuz he told u? Or u know what a 5.0 looks like when compared to the 4.6? Or even the 3.8 stangs?

pssssh i didn't even know they ran those sh1t motors that long lol

i love imagination time

I think he just likes to say 5.0 l engines in it cause the 95 cougar didn't have that engine in it...

TOTALLY believable .... i smoked a ls2 GTO in my mums malibu 3.1.

Sorry it's a 94 cougar xr7 limited eddition and it did have a 5.0 v8 in it look it up

I'm no Ford guy, but it still had the 4.6 in '94.

Originally Posted by Sesleeper

Sorry it's a 94 cougar xr7 limited eddition and it did have a 5.0 v8 in it look it up

think ur wrong bud... 91-93 had the 5.0 windsor in it.
3.8 L Essex V6 (1989–1997)
5.0 L Windsor V8 (1991–93)
4.6 L Modular V8 (1994–97) <<<<< had 205 hp

what did 3.1's have to the wheel? 12hp?

so this story is totally believable

my mums 3.1 wont even breakem loose on dry pavement. barely does it on wet pavement.

Mum...?

Wut are we, in the UK?

Quick question -- was your 3.1 running on pixie dust?